The document discusses key aspects of arbitration law in India, including the Arbitration and Conciliation Act of 1996. The Act aims to minimize the role of courts in arbitration and establish arbitration as a self-contained procedure. It discusses some important sections of the Act related to interim measures, jurisdiction of tribunals, appeals, costs and evidence. It also discusses cases related to the applicability of the Code of Civil Procedure and notes there is debate around whether provisions of CPC apply to arbitration proceedings in civil courts.

2. Arbitration Mediation
Concilliation
Judicial
Settlement
ADR’s

3. Arbitration and Conciliation
Act, 1996
• Civil Procedure Code, 1908
UNCITRAL
• New York Convention, 1958

4. Why?
• The Act was enacted in 1996
to fall in line with UNCITRAL
International Commercial
Arbitration laws
What?
• Deals with domestic arbitration
and enforcement of foreign
awards

5. • To minimise the supervisory role of courts in the
arbitral process. The words “arbitral process”
extends to the proceedings arising out of an
arbitral award, in any civil court, under the
various provisions of the Act of 1996 also. If this
interpretation is accepted, then the role of the
civil courts while dealing with any matter,
arising out of the Act of 1996, shall be guided
and controlled by the Arbitration and
Conciliation Act of 1996 itself, as the Arbitration
Act is “a self-contained code” in itself and one
need not go beyond the Act for any procedural
aspects to be followed in any civil courts.
Clause
(v)

6. S. 9
• Interim Measures
by the court
• A party may,
before or during
arbitral
proceedings or at
any time after the
making of the
arbitral award but
before it is
enforced in
accordance with
section 36
S.16
• Absolute power
to rule on
jurisdiction to
the Tribunal.
• Existence or
validity of
arbitration
agreements also
to be decided
only by Tribunal.
S.34 r/w 37
• Appeal
on limited
question
of fact
and law

7. S. 16 r/w
34 (2) (a)
• Revision
S. 31
• Ss. 34 and 35
of CPC
incorporated
• Concepts of
costs and
interest
covered
thereby.
S. 27
• Arbitrator
to seek
assistance
of court to
record
evidence.

8. S. 26
• Appoint
commission
ers and
experts to
adjudicate
disputes.
S. 19
• No arbitral
tribunal shall be
bound by the
CPC, 1908 or
the Evidence
Act, 1872

9. “The applicability of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908.—
Subject to what is provided for, in the Arbitration and
Conciliation Act and these rules, the provisions of the Code
of Civil Procedure and the Karnataka Civil Rules of Practice,
may be applied to the proceedings under the Act to the
extent considered necessary or appropriate by the Court, or
judicial authority.”
Fear that decisions may be challenged in the higher courts, for not complying
with the provisions of CPC etc. This attitude of the parties and courts, it is felt,
is contrary to the very object of the law of arbitration and inconsistent with the
main objective, which is to minimise the supervisory role of court in the arbitral
process.

10. ITIv.SiemensNetwork
The Act of 1996 has
not expressly barred
the application of
provisions of CPC, no
inference can be
drawn that CPC is not
applicable to the
proceedings arising
out of the Act in the
civil courts
PushpaMv.Admiral
RadhakrishnanTahlani
The exclusion can also
be a matter of direct
inference from the law
itself. No doubt, this
decision cannot stand
against the decision of
the Hon’ble Supreme
Court of India in ITI
Ltd. case
KonkanRlyCorporation
v.RaniConstructions
Any rules framed by
the Chief Justice,
including the Chief
Justice of India, under
the Act, which are
inconsistent with or
beyond the terms of
the statute, have been
held to be bad and
suggested to be
amended. In this view,
Rule 12, framed by the
Hon’ble High Court of
Karnataka, may need
revision

11.  Even when the reference for Arbitration has been made under
section 89(2) the provisions of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act,
1996 shall apply as if the proceedings for Arbitration or Conciliation
were referred for settlement under the provisions of Section 8 of the
Act. The 1996 Act governs a case where arbitration is agreed upon
before or pending a suit by all the parties. It however, doesn’t
contemplate a situation as in s.89 where the Court asks the parties
to choose one or other ADRs. The Act would apply only from the
stage after reference.